Making Sense: Philosophy in the Headlines, by Julian Baggini
I was originally drawn to this book because of the title, "Making Sense" with its constructionist overtones. While the book is more an overview of philosophical thinking and how it can be applied to understanding current events, I still think it was well worth my time.
First, this was a great book for explaining philosophical concepts and critical thinking without getting weighed down in big terms. I took one philosophy class in college. We read Descartes, Spinoza, Locke, Hume, and others. My mind quickly glazed over in that way that only philosophy can make a young mind glaze over. Baggini, on the other hand, is very practical in his approach to philosophy. In this book philosophy is a means to an end; used to think clearly and help unravel the assumptions behind the issues for major news stories of our day. Of course the fact that utilitarianism seems to be Baggini's core philosophical assumption doesn't hurt his presentation!
Most of the book is devoted to taking specific examples and thinking through them in a rational manner. The Clinton sex scandal, the war on terrorism, stem cell research, abortion, and genetically modified foods are just a few of the issues he tackles. In each case he carefully asks questions aimed to deconstruct the arguments used for and against. Disassembled in this way, the reader can take a look at the various pieces that make up an argument and decide for themselves what is compelling and what is not. Even when you don't agree with Baggini's conclusions on the matter (and often I did not) his process helped me think through issues in a more reasoned way.
The strongest part of the book was Baggini's contrast between rhetoric and reasoned argument. Watch closely the next time you see a politician speak on TV. Do they assume their conclusion (rhetoric) or do they provide evidence to support drawing their conclusion (reasoned argument)? If every voter could make the distinction between reason and rhetoric there would be a revolution in the way people think about issues! While it may not end up affecting the outcome of elections (for I think reasoned arguments can often be made on many sides of an issue) I think it would inoculate us against some of the more extreme positions out there, and foster better domestic and foreign policy.
Baggini's treatment of religion, on the other hand, was somewhat weak. I was raised as a fundamentalist and trained to see reason and faith to be in strict opposition; now I'm an Episcopalian who sees reason and faith as complementing each other. Baggini critiques the fundamentalist view of religion, but seems unaware of any alternatives to this other than atheism. Most people of faith lie somewhere in the middle, and it was disappointing to read Baggini paint them with such a broad brush.
Publisher: Oxford University Press, USA (January 15, 2004); ISBN: 0192805061
Showing posts with label ethics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ethics. Show all posts
The Strange Redemption of Sister Mary Ann
|
6.9.04
'The Strange Redemption of Sister Mary Ann,' by Mike Moscoe
This haunting eight page tale of a woman looking back on a full, long life while suffering through the terminal stages of cancer barely qualifies as science fiction, at least on first glance. What science there is gets developed as she questions some of the choices she made to delay childbirth through birth control and have children through in-virtro fertilization. Her culminating life choice of joining a convent in her twilight years definitely challenges prevailing notions of the role of traditional religion in modern society. Yet author Mike Moscoe provides no easy answers, instead preferring to let us live with the tension the questions evoke. As such 'The Strange Redemption of Sister Mary Ann' is a beautiful, evocative and wistful tale that stirs the emotions and supports further reflection.
Mary Ann's life, up until the end, has been full, rich, and rewarding. A successful career, wonderful husband, happy children, and satisfying sex life symbolize the American dream and all that scientific and material abundance promise. It isn't until her husband dies and she is diagnosed with cancer that Mary Ann starts to question the potential cost of these choices, and starts to be haunted by the images of her unborn children in her dreams. Perhaps hoping to resolve the tension between her faith and her life actions, Mary Ann joins a convent where she leads a life of inward and outward piety, all the while struggling with ethical, philosophical, and theological questions. Where does life begin? What is the nature of existence after death? Do theologians have anything meaningful to offer?
I'm continually impressed by good efforts to integrate broader sociological, spiritual, and psychological questions into science fiction. Roscoe is not an author I remember reading before, but I'll be sure to be on the lookout for his works in the future.
PUBLISHER: Analog Science Fiction and Fact (Astounding); Dell Publishers; ISSN: 10592113 (November, 2004)
This haunting eight page tale of a woman looking back on a full, long life while suffering through the terminal stages of cancer barely qualifies as science fiction, at least on first glance. What science there is gets developed as she questions some of the choices she made to delay childbirth through birth control and have children through in-virtro fertilization. Her culminating life choice of joining a convent in her twilight years definitely challenges prevailing notions of the role of traditional religion in modern society. Yet author Mike Moscoe provides no easy answers, instead preferring to let us live with the tension the questions evoke. As such 'The Strange Redemption of Sister Mary Ann' is a beautiful, evocative and wistful tale that stirs the emotions and supports further reflection.
Mary Ann's life, up until the end, has been full, rich, and rewarding. A successful career, wonderful husband, happy children, and satisfying sex life symbolize the American dream and all that scientific and material abundance promise. It isn't until her husband dies and she is diagnosed with cancer that Mary Ann starts to question the potential cost of these choices, and starts to be haunted by the images of her unborn children in her dreams. Perhaps hoping to resolve the tension between her faith and her life actions, Mary Ann joins a convent where she leads a life of inward and outward piety, all the while struggling with ethical, philosophical, and theological questions. Where does life begin? What is the nature of existence after death? Do theologians have anything meaningful to offer?
I'm continually impressed by good efforts to integrate broader sociological, spiritual, and psychological questions into science fiction. Roscoe is not an author I remember reading before, but I'll be sure to be on the lookout for his works in the future.
PUBLISHER: Analog Science Fiction and Fact (Astounding); Dell Publishers; ISSN: 10592113 (November, 2004)
Dibs
|
28.1.04
'Dibs', by Brian Plante
If I didn't realize it already, I'm now gaining an even greater awareness that it is a real talent to write a good science fiction short story. In just a few pages an author must flesh out believable characters, motives, and settings. Then there is the added ingredient that makes the story SF --a compelling ethical, philosophical, or physical issue that is raised by or solved with science or technology.
I thought Brian Plante did a fine job of using these elements artistically in 'Lavender in Love', which I reviewed last January. That story dealt with robots and artificial intelligence. This time, Plante tackles the ethical issues raised by organ donation --both voluntary and involuntary. If three people's lives would be saved, is it justified for doctors to kill you and harvest your organs to save them? Shouldn't a truly moral person be willing to sacrifice themselves if they know they will do greater good dead than alive? Is it ever morally justified for someone in need to call "dibs" on your heart, liver, skin, or spleen? When do the needs of the many truly outweigh the needs of the few?
Plante imagines a near-future world in which available organs and needy recipients can be matched with computer precision, --and the sick can lay claim on the organs of the healthy under the right circumstances! Told in the first person from the point of view of David Danila, a government employee whose organs are in risk of being involuntarily harvested, we are taken on an emotional and ethical roller coaster ride. David struggles both for survival and with the ethical issues surrounding organ donation --all in just six pages!
Brian Plante is definitely an author to watch, both in the pages of Analog and elsewhere.
PUBLISHER: Analog Science Fiction and Fact (Astounding); Dell Publishers; ISSN: 10592113 (April, 2004)
If I didn't realize it already, I'm now gaining an even greater awareness that it is a real talent to write a good science fiction short story. In just a few pages an author must flesh out believable characters, motives, and settings. Then there is the added ingredient that makes the story SF --a compelling ethical, philosophical, or physical issue that is raised by or solved with science or technology.
I thought Brian Plante did a fine job of using these elements artistically in 'Lavender in Love', which I reviewed last January. That story dealt with robots and artificial intelligence. This time, Plante tackles the ethical issues raised by organ donation --both voluntary and involuntary. If three people's lives would be saved, is it justified for doctors to kill you and harvest your organs to save them? Shouldn't a truly moral person be willing to sacrifice themselves if they know they will do greater good dead than alive? Is it ever morally justified for someone in need to call "dibs" on your heart, liver, skin, or spleen? When do the needs of the many truly outweigh the needs of the few?
Plante imagines a near-future world in which available organs and needy recipients can be matched with computer precision, --and the sick can lay claim on the organs of the healthy under the right circumstances! Told in the first person from the point of view of David Danila, a government employee whose organs are in risk of being involuntarily harvested, we are taken on an emotional and ethical roller coaster ride. David struggles both for survival and with the ethical issues surrounding organ donation --all in just six pages!
Brian Plante is definitely an author to watch, both in the pages of Analog and elsewhere.
PUBLISHER: Analog Science Fiction and Fact (Astounding); Dell Publishers; ISSN: 10592113 (April, 2004)
Not a Drop to Drink
|
8.7.03
'Not A Drop To Drink,' by Grey Rollins
Grey Rollins' 16 page short story 'Not A Drop To Drink' examines group dynamics, mob rule, and the violence associated with religious fundamentalism within the context of a classic "hard SF" short story. The premise is simple: Colonists stuck on a world with little fresh water debate dwindling alternatives to ensure their survival. After discarding other options which have proven ineffective, scientist Lalo Helsink makes a daring proposal: genetically engineer the children to have salt glands so that they can drink the abundant seawater found on the planet. Without this modification the colony's needs will outstrip the fresh water supply in a matter of years, ensuring death.
While most are uneasy with such a draconian solution, it is seen as the only alternative to certain death. Not so for Agnes Beeson, leader of a Christian prayer group in the colony. She and her followers believe that God is punishing the colony for lack of faith, and if they pray hard enough rain will come. She believes that genetic tinkering on humans is an abomination --displaying lack of faith in God's design when God created humans.
With the colony still ambivalent, the plan goes forward and the first generation of "salties" --children with salt tracks that stem from their eyes to rid their bodies of excess salt-- is born. Beeson will not be stopped, however, and soon acts of vandalism against Helsink and the parents of the "salties" erupt in the colony. These violent acts finally culminate in a fire that consumes eight houses and kills two adults. The story ends as Helsink and the families leave the colony. Although they lack resources and are in the minority, their future seems hopeful because --through more genetic engineering in order to avoid inbreeding-- they can still reproduce in large enough numbers to establish a viable colony.
This story raised two questions for me. First, when religious fundamentalism gains power, is violence inevitable? If one is merely talking about Christian or Muslim conservatives who believe they take the Bible or Qur'an literally --I don't think that alone is enough to guarantee a violent sect. Historically there have been textual literalists who also included an ethic of non-violence in their belief systems --finding the justification for non-violence in the very texts they attempt to follow so scrupulously. I see the defining characteristic of fundamentalism as the tendency to demonize the other. When one's ethical system encourages one to see evil as an external force resident in some other group, instead of recognizing the evil that lurks within --or seeing God as Other-- it's easy to legitimize violence against groups that are different in any way.
Secondly, is it moral to genetically engineer human beings? Many in contemporary Western society draw a distinction between reproductive cloning (which they see as "playing God" with the process that leads to birth) and therapeutic cloning or gene therapies (which they see as helpful medicine.) For me 'Not a Drop to Drink' exposes some of the flaws in this kind of thinking by showing that actually changing the human genome is far more radical than using the technology to simply make a copy of another human being, flaws and all. I tend to see using genetic technology to help infertile couples --or perhaps help gay and lesbian couples pass on their genes-- as a relatively benign use of the technology. Adding and subtracting things to human genes seems more provocative, raising questions about the extent to which our genes make us human, and the boundaries of what can be considered human at all.
PUBLISHER: July/August 2003 issue of Analog: Science Fiction and Fact (Astounding). Pages 100-118. Dell Magazines. New York. ISSN: 1059-2113.
Grey Rollins' 16 page short story 'Not A Drop To Drink' examines group dynamics, mob rule, and the violence associated with religious fundamentalism within the context of a classic "hard SF" short story. The premise is simple: Colonists stuck on a world with little fresh water debate dwindling alternatives to ensure their survival. After discarding other options which have proven ineffective, scientist Lalo Helsink makes a daring proposal: genetically engineer the children to have salt glands so that they can drink the abundant seawater found on the planet. Without this modification the colony's needs will outstrip the fresh water supply in a matter of years, ensuring death.
While most are uneasy with such a draconian solution, it is seen as the only alternative to certain death. Not so for Agnes Beeson, leader of a Christian prayer group in the colony. She and her followers believe that God is punishing the colony for lack of faith, and if they pray hard enough rain will come. She believes that genetic tinkering on humans is an abomination --displaying lack of faith in God's design when God created humans.
With the colony still ambivalent, the plan goes forward and the first generation of "salties" --children with salt tracks that stem from their eyes to rid their bodies of excess salt-- is born. Beeson will not be stopped, however, and soon acts of vandalism against Helsink and the parents of the "salties" erupt in the colony. These violent acts finally culminate in a fire that consumes eight houses and kills two adults. The story ends as Helsink and the families leave the colony. Although they lack resources and are in the minority, their future seems hopeful because --through more genetic engineering in order to avoid inbreeding-- they can still reproduce in large enough numbers to establish a viable colony.
This story raised two questions for me. First, when religious fundamentalism gains power, is violence inevitable? If one is merely talking about Christian or Muslim conservatives who believe they take the Bible or Qur'an literally --I don't think that alone is enough to guarantee a violent sect. Historically there have been textual literalists who also included an ethic of non-violence in their belief systems --finding the justification for non-violence in the very texts they attempt to follow so scrupulously. I see the defining characteristic of fundamentalism as the tendency to demonize the other. When one's ethical system encourages one to see evil as an external force resident in some other group, instead of recognizing the evil that lurks within --or seeing God as Other-- it's easy to legitimize violence against groups that are different in any way.
Secondly, is it moral to genetically engineer human beings? Many in contemporary Western society draw a distinction between reproductive cloning (which they see as "playing God" with the process that leads to birth) and therapeutic cloning or gene therapies (which they see as helpful medicine.) For me 'Not a Drop to Drink' exposes some of the flaws in this kind of thinking by showing that actually changing the human genome is far more radical than using the technology to simply make a copy of another human being, flaws and all. I tend to see using genetic technology to help infertile couples --or perhaps help gay and lesbian couples pass on their genes-- as a relatively benign use of the technology. Adding and subtracting things to human genes seems more provocative, raising questions about the extent to which our genes make us human, and the boundaries of what can be considered human at all.
PUBLISHER: July/August 2003 issue of Analog: Science Fiction and Fact (Astounding). Pages 100-118. Dell Magazines. New York. ISSN: 1059-2113.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
